Why I'm still a libertarian

I know it's trendy on DU to think that libertarians are worse than republicans, but after all the shit that has come out on the NSA spying on Americans, off site water boarding torture cells, and of course the bogus war in Iraq, I'm still proud to call myself a libertarian. And I don't even smoke pot.

Do you? Both philosophies are concerned with liberty.

Besides, there's a big difference between Ayn Rand worshippin' Libertarians and your average run-of-the-mill social or civil libertarian.

What do you think?

She even said so. As for myself, I don't see how capitalism and libertarianism can be compatible.

But I think we're stuck with it in our lifetimes. I don't see anything ending capitalism until we either get our collective heads out of our asses or Star Trek style replicators come into existence and I don't think either's going to happen soon. So the best we can do is minimize the harm. Sad, but I think it's true.

As far as Ayn Rand, I know, but you've got to admit there's a lot of Ayn Rand worshippers in the Libertarian party.

Anarcho-libertarian philosophy used to be linked to names like Mikhail Bakunin, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Benjamin Tucker, and Emma Goldman. Now, it's linked to people who write crazy assed defenses of Confederate States who were upholding the "principle" of states rights.

I don't think "Star Trek style replicators" would make capitalism defunct, unfortunately. After all, we have perfect replicators for information, called the computer and yet the governments of the world are determined to make it more and more difficult for society to take advantage of such a device. With the ever more draconian copyright laws, the expansion of patents to cover computer software and other trivia, it's a wonder we can share information with one another at all.

I understand why you say replicators would end capitalism and frankly it should because the scarcity problem would be solved but the current behaviour of the capitalist governments of the world suggest that they would simply outlaw such a device in order to keep the corporations happy.

Mostly since most libertarians I have met are Capitalists with a capital 'C' and refuse to believe the "free" market may be unable to fix the world...

I admire their intellectual, analytical, consistent approach to things and share more than a few attitudes when it comes to so-called victimless crimes.

However ... I nevertheless cannot accept their overall view about the role of government in regulating the economy and preventing instiutional abuses. And, I'm afrid, I cannot help but see an underlying attitude of Social Darwinism in their rejectionist views on the role of government in supporting the common weal.

regarding libertarians. I am not against them on many social issues, but economically we are worlds apart.

Economic issues or social issues?

Just wondering.

Any abridgment of freedom, whether economic or social, should be looked upon with great suspicion, as it is most often manifested as tyranny. If it helps, my economic position leans towards socialism.

But i thought socialism was the antithesis of economic freedom.


PS- Thanks for indulging me. I've always been very interested in Libertarianism.

The long answer falls into something similar to participatory economics (http://www.zmag.org/parecon/indexnew.htm), which is a bit too bureaucratic for my tastes, but it's a step in the right direction.

Economic freedom involves having control over your job, over your workplace. That's socialism - empowering the workers to control the economy.

Under radical capitalism economic freedom is squashed, except for the "freedom" of the master to oppress and exploit his workers.

can you say you're a libertarian----it just doesn't make sense?

Could you clarify that for me?

Capitalism is anti-liberty. Whether it's the government denying your liberty or corporations denying your liberty makes no difference to me, it's all authoritarianism in my book.

You're not as bad as republicans. You got the basics figured out, that the government needs to be limited in its ability to do things like spy on the masses or it will get stupid. Now you just need to understand that it can be a powerful tool for things like social security, and you will be a full blooded Democrat!

come out as a liberal libertarian.

They're recruiting tools.

It's the laissez-faire economic policies that we find repugnant.

It's a wide world out there. Take a peek outside some time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian

Anyway, that goes to show that indeed, just saying "i'm a libertarian" doesn't mean anything.

and "government is evil unless it's doing things I agree with" libertarians. I tend to dismiss the latter group because they give such a wide definition to the concept of "libertarianism" that they render the word meaningless.

to accommodate THEIR crackpot views.

Libertarian socialism is any one of a group of political philosophies dedicated to opposing coercive forms of authority and social hierarchy, in particular the institutions of capitalism and the state.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism

Are you a right libertarian? Or a left libertarian like me???

;)

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon was a libertarian.

in the sense of any current "organized" Libertarian group.

You do sound like a civil libertarian.

Proudhon was the intellectual forebear of socialism and various anarchical movements far more than of any libertarian movement.

Most people know that.

repukes are "libertarians"

See A.1.3 http://www.infoshop.org/faq/secA1.html

Since there are some many types, ranging from free-market fundamentalism to anarcho-syndicalism.
So just saying "i'm a libertarian" doesn't mean anything.

Although I think that the small l libertarian is enough to cast a big enough tent over civil libertarians, LPers, and anarchists when it comes to subjects like wiretaps, torturing prisoners, and wars of imperialism and aggression.

I don't think Libertarians are worse than Republicans. I like their foreign policy beliefs. But I think they forget that we live in a world dominated by corporations. Your domestic policies would be great in a world dominated by farmers who manufacture their own clothes, food, medicines, means of transportation, and thousands of other daily things we depend on. Today, Americans are dependent on distant corporations for their daily needs. This requires a lot of regulations. It's not 1820 anymore.

between market capitalism and socialist ideas (read New Deal, War on Poverty, etc.).

It allowed freedom and innovation to coexist with a social safety net.

This is now disappearing.


We are moving to a completely free market (for corporations and the wealthy) and little personal freedom for anyone else.

That last bit is the nightmare for anyone... Libertarian, or otherwise.

that is the direction we are heading, I also think there have
been very few instances of a truly "free" market and those
instances are very short lived. For the most part markets
are manipulated.

You know, air, rivers, oceans, land held in common for the People.